When I get into political discussions, I get called a liberal and socialist. When I get into similar discussion on science fiction and fantasy I get called a SJW (social justice warrior). I get that these people are trying to insult me and usually act accordingly, but what I rarely talk about is how accurate these terms, when applied with their correct meanings, are.
I have been a science fiction and fantasy reader since.... well I can't really remember. At first I read both, not really having a preference, but gradually I dove into science fiction. I think the wide variety of quality media had a lot to do with it. The fantasy options in movies and TV left a lot to be desired back in the 80's. I started out with Star Wars, then Doctor Who, and then (even though my mother had been trying since I was born) Star Trek. When I found Star Trek I become a huge fan. I watched the original series religiously on weekdays and Battlestar Galactica on weekends.
And I read. Asimov, Heinlein, Norton, the Star Trek Pocket Books series, and a host of others. I always had a book with me or was scribbling my own story attempts in notebooks. I am a great fan of behind the scenes stories and I have absorbed the influences, inspirations, and goals of Gene Roddenberry and George Lucas.
What that all culminates in is me. I am a product of what I read, of my family background, of where I grew up. And as a result, my politics are viciously moderate. I do not put up with either extreme conservatives or extreme liberals very well. I don't tolerate bullies or liars or people who twist things around to suit their telling of the story.
So where does that leave me today? I am a firm believer in equality for all. A lot of my beliefs were tempered by Star Trek. Anyone who actually paid attention to what Gene was doing will know that he didn't hold with the racist and misogynistic attitudes of the 1960's. While it is hard to see it to day, he cast the most ethnically diverse and gender equal cast of the decade. He poured his idealism into the Vulcans and their ideal of IDIC (Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations). Star Trek featured the first interracial kiss and the first same sex kiss on television. It starred a mixed species character. Gene wanted it to feature a woman as second in command, but that went to far for 60's sensibilities.
From the written word I got more of the same. Equality, diversity, justice, doing what is right, fighting those who don't want things to change. I seriously don't believe that science fiction can exist without the so called 'SJW's because so much of the genre has focused on that for so long. Heinlein's first novel from 1939, For Us, The Living, touches on all this. Asimov challenged us to find the robot, Andrew Martin, human in Bicentennial Man. Time after time, story after story, this is what I have read. This idea by one group that SJW's are a new thing and have "taken over" the genre and are redirecting it from its roots is asinine. This so called SJW movement IS the genre of science fiction. It always has been. The people who use SJW or the more ridiculous GHH are the ones trying to change the genre to suit their political beliefs.
I have this nice chart that shows the voting habits of our US government and it clearly shows how far our government has descended into madness. The right has gotten more and more radical over the last 40 years to the point where even trying to discuss things with those of that bent is an exercise in frustration. This movement that accuses science fiction of being taken over by SJW's seems to stem from the same right-wing insanity. Yes, the stories have gotten more daring, with more homosexual and transgender characters, with more equality for all, but isn't that what we have been building towards? Isn't that what Gene Roddenberry saw in our future? Is that not what Star Trek portrayed? Is that not what the writers were striving for in the constraints of their time?
So I fail to see the danger in what these people fear because it is what the genre has been striving for since its inception. And who cares if a year or two sees more women winning awards than men? We've had it the other way for far too long and it is about time the majority gender gets its due? So if anyone cares to call me an SJW for these viewpoints, or a liberal, or socialist, I see no point in taking it as the insult they mean. It is time to own up that even as a moderate, I have causes to fight and equality of all is a big one.
On one final note, this post/rant was inspired by a blog post by David Mack (http://www.davidmack.pro/blog/?p=5219) that finds him dealing with this issue with someone who has no clue what a social justice warrior Gene Roddenberry was.
Showing posts with label SJW. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SJW. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 2, 2015
Friday, April 10, 2015
Taking Sides - Rescuing the Hugos
There are some times when you can't sit by the sidelines. I find that now is one of those times.
There has evidently been a movement afoot for a couple of years to change the lineup of titles that get nominated for the Hugo Awards. The creator of this movement has called it Sad Puppies. This year, it was actually successful, probably because it was joined by a nearly identical movement called Rabid Puppies.
How the Hugo Awards are supposed to work is that those who have paid membership to the World-Con (either attending members of non-attending associate members) can nominate and then vote for the winners. From the breakdown of nominations, it appears that most nominees receive under 100 nominations, so this isn't something that has high participation. For honest nominations, you need to read the works in question. The top five (six in case there is a tie for fifth place) titles in each category go on the ballot. That is how it is supposed to work.
Well, the two puppies movements each listed a slate of desired nominees. In several of the categories, the puppies movement nominees swept the nominations. The big question is if the people doing the nominating even read what they were nominating. If they didn't then quite a number of titles have dishonestly been nominated based on even fewer readings than normal. From the numbers, it looks like it was about 50 people who jumped on board and nominated the full puppies slate. Its also possible that there were more who only nominated some of the slate. Either way, it was a concerted effort to derail the normal process.
I've seen several of the supporters of the puppies moments claim that the nominations have been dominated by Social Justice Warriors (SJW) as if that were a derivative term. The science fiction I grew up on and love has always pushed for equality and justice so if following that example makes one a SJW, so be it, I am one. I was raised in a Christian household and the focus was always about being fair and just and living by Jesus's example. I grew up reading science fiction where the color of your skin, gender, and sexual preference made no difference. The TV shows and movies I enjoy have always been blind to race. Star Trek went out of its way to be more integrated than was normal. MASH taught me the horror of war and the duty of doing your part and treating the enemy as people. So if all this is bad, then the acknowledged greats of science fiction, television, and the movies have been wrong for many years. Sorry, but I don't buy that.
Instead what I have seen is the growing insanity of the right wing movement in this country. I was a Republican at one time, but the party has moved from where it was in the 80's and what it professed to stand for to adopt an insane mix of religious right causes along side some very un-Christian fiscal conservative causes and all that wrapped up in and anti-science and anti-education bundle that moves further to the right each year.
Meanwhile, I remain much where I was in the 80's, when talk of national health care was not a liberal socialist cause, but a concern for all. Where everyone was in favor of helping up the poor in this country and everyone was in favor of education and the space program. Today, it is like we have politicians from the 19th century trying to pull us backwards and I feel that is what the puppies movements are trying to do to science fiction. They champion the Edgar Rice Burroughs male dominated tropes (fine for 1915, but not fine for 2015) and ignore how broad and vast science fiction has become. They bemoan the straying from the likes of Dune and Foundation while ignoring the rich tapestry of what we have now. They blame a secret cabal of SJW's when in fact the makeup of the genre has changed and they have failed to change along with it. Are they write that some deserving titles have not gotten nominated? Perhaps, but the solution to that is a campaign for a title or two and not a total takeover of the the award nomination slate.
The puppies movements are a sign of the poison of our time. Normally the wackos are spread equally between the right and the left, but today I see a disproportionate number on the right along with a disproportionate lack of education, belief in conspiracy theories, and belief in dogma over facts. The puppies movements are no different and if they keep this up, there are those of us who will fight back. Mark my words, this hijacking of the Hugo Awards will not go down without a fight and I will be right there in the thick of things.
There has evidently been a movement afoot for a couple of years to change the lineup of titles that get nominated for the Hugo Awards. The creator of this movement has called it Sad Puppies. This year, it was actually successful, probably because it was joined by a nearly identical movement called Rabid Puppies.
How the Hugo Awards are supposed to work is that those who have paid membership to the World-Con (either attending members of non-attending associate members) can nominate and then vote for the winners. From the breakdown of nominations, it appears that most nominees receive under 100 nominations, so this isn't something that has high participation. For honest nominations, you need to read the works in question. The top five (six in case there is a tie for fifth place) titles in each category go on the ballot. That is how it is supposed to work.
Well, the two puppies movements each listed a slate of desired nominees. In several of the categories, the puppies movement nominees swept the nominations. The big question is if the people doing the nominating even read what they were nominating. If they didn't then quite a number of titles have dishonestly been nominated based on even fewer readings than normal. From the numbers, it looks like it was about 50 people who jumped on board and nominated the full puppies slate. Its also possible that there were more who only nominated some of the slate. Either way, it was a concerted effort to derail the normal process.
I've seen several of the supporters of the puppies moments claim that the nominations have been dominated by Social Justice Warriors (SJW) as if that were a derivative term. The science fiction I grew up on and love has always pushed for equality and justice so if following that example makes one a SJW, so be it, I am one. I was raised in a Christian household and the focus was always about being fair and just and living by Jesus's example. I grew up reading science fiction where the color of your skin, gender, and sexual preference made no difference. The TV shows and movies I enjoy have always been blind to race. Star Trek went out of its way to be more integrated than was normal. MASH taught me the horror of war and the duty of doing your part and treating the enemy as people. So if all this is bad, then the acknowledged greats of science fiction, television, and the movies have been wrong for many years. Sorry, but I don't buy that.
Instead what I have seen is the growing insanity of the right wing movement in this country. I was a Republican at one time, but the party has moved from where it was in the 80's and what it professed to stand for to adopt an insane mix of religious right causes along side some very un-Christian fiscal conservative causes and all that wrapped up in and anti-science and anti-education bundle that moves further to the right each year.
Meanwhile, I remain much where I was in the 80's, when talk of national health care was not a liberal socialist cause, but a concern for all. Where everyone was in favor of helping up the poor in this country and everyone was in favor of education and the space program. Today, it is like we have politicians from the 19th century trying to pull us backwards and I feel that is what the puppies movements are trying to do to science fiction. They champion the Edgar Rice Burroughs male dominated tropes (fine for 1915, but not fine for 2015) and ignore how broad and vast science fiction has become. They bemoan the straying from the likes of Dune and Foundation while ignoring the rich tapestry of what we have now. They blame a secret cabal of SJW's when in fact the makeup of the genre has changed and they have failed to change along with it. Are they write that some deserving titles have not gotten nominated? Perhaps, but the solution to that is a campaign for a title or two and not a total takeover of the the award nomination slate.
The puppies movements are a sign of the poison of our time. Normally the wackos are spread equally between the right and the left, but today I see a disproportionate number on the right along with a disproportionate lack of education, belief in conspiracy theories, and belief in dogma over facts. The puppies movements are no different and if they keep this up, there are those of us who will fight back. Mark my words, this hijacking of the Hugo Awards will not go down without a fight and I will be right there in the thick of things.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)